Day 2 Of Saarang MUN 2011

Session 3:

Economic and Social council (ECOSOC)-Morning session of 27^th January,2011

The proceedings began at 9.30 A.M. in the media resource center of the Central Library and was chaired by Amogh Dhar Sharma ,the vice chair being Mr.Sravan M. Baddepudi .The President of the general assembly, Ms.Avantika Kannan was also present.

The session began with the vice-chair calling out the roll, asking the delegates to vote on the 3 motions proposed at the end of the previous session. All the three failed owing to the lack of votes in favour. This was just the beginning of what we call “the saga of failed motions” and the “mystery of the number 3”.Confused?Read on.!

The countries that organized themselves into groups in the previous session submitted their respective working papers which were explained

to the council by one representative country from each of the 3 groups, the countries being India, Indonesia, Germany. Each working paper had five to six clauses at least which means we had about 18 clauses but sadly, not 18 distinct clauses. Though the clauses differed in their overall portrayal, most of them were within the purview of three main issues viz. youth entrepreneurship as a subject in secondary school, technical and financial aid to developing countries, launching women entrepreneurship empowerment council. Out of the 18 clauses referred to above, 9 clauses were passed by the council(working paper 1-clauses 2,5 working paper 2-clauses 2,4 working paper 3-1,2,3,4a,7)

The delegate of Russia then requested for an un-moderated caucus for 15 minutes to discuss the working papers. The announcement of the general speakers list was succeeded by the delegate of Thailand-the first on the list- addressing the council. Many points were raised by the delegates to the chair in response to thailand’s address and after a debate,Bang! 3 more motions were proposed and BANG again! All the 3 failed (The number three again!).

The delegates, owing to the better part of their wisdom requested for the discretion of the chair on the matter. Unfortunately, the chair denied it owing to the unofficial nature of the request. This resulted in another un-moderated caucus of 20 minutes which ended in 1 (3/3=1) resolution being passed on ”The role of UN in making the developed nations help the developing ones” .

Main points made:

1. Soft loans between developed and developing nations.

2. Exchange programs like food for oil so that no loss is incurred by both the nations.

3. *Monitoring imports and exports.

4. Establishing banking sectors to finance the youth entrepreneurship programs

5. Tax relief till an industry/enterprise becomes stable.

6. *Application of technology.

*Note: 3*2=6. We dint say “mystery of the number 3” in vain!

The session ended on a positive note with the chair hoping to convene a more fruitful session in the afternoon with the council discussing issues of concern in the moderated caucuses. Though the un-moderated caucuses saw the domination of certain countries: China, USA(why aren’t we surprised)Armenia, Russia and India, the proceedings were held in a smooth fashion. The chair

was assertive, the delegates maintained an even temperament and tempo of the house was in tact till the end. However , the chair himself declared that 12 motions had failed and this makes us a little curious as to how many motions the council succeeded in passing in the next session and why their constant loyalty towards the number three and its multiples;)

Catch up on the session in its original form. Watch our videos!

Unmoderated Caucus in progress.

The Chair's address Part-1:Expectations and Clarifications

The Chair's address Part-2

Session 4:

Human Rights Council (HRC) – Afternoon session of 27^th January 2011

The session was chaired by Ms.Anita Srinivasan and started off at 2.40 p.m. in the Conference Hall 2 of the IC&SR Building. The vice chair Ms.Smriti Suresh and the Director of Security Council Reforms, Ramit Malhotra were also the members of the executive board.

The Chair inquired of the delegates about the outcome of the un-moderated caucus that happened at the starting of the second session for the day. The delegates ,then ,informed the chair of the necessity to pass the motion on “Extent of extra judicial punishment”. The chair wanted to know if there were any other motions on the floor to be passed .

First Motion

The delegate of Iran’s proposal to discuss on “Should not the watch dog inspection by the USA be considered foreign interference” was passed.

“All is well until only one man speaks ” said an anonymous person: Once the council started discussing the motion, there was an out blast of words on the issue from various nations as expected. The delegates of the Islamic republics, USA ,South East Asian countries ,other Middle Eastern countries - mainly the first two countries - discussed and later argued in accusatory and defensive tones. There were instances when the delegates digressed from the topic under discussion owing to their verbosity, lapses in focus and had to be reminded to stick to the proposed motion by the delegate of USA. The delegate of USA stated-

“If a country has nothing to hide, they would not fear” which met with an uproar from various delegates and thumping from yet others in approval of the statement and signaling the end of the moderated caucus.

Failed, yet discussed Motion!

The motion on ”Bias shown by the UN council towards Israel and certain nations in the matter :Membership into the Human Rights council” proposed by the delegate of Israel failed due to the lack of votes. The council was then witness to a face-off between the delegate of Iran and Israel with a little involvement of the USA (Now, again, why doesn’t that surprise us) on the failed motion, which was opened to discussion by the chair when the delegate of Iran raised a point of information.

This continued for a considerable amount of time when the executive committee had to intervene by saying that the discussion at that point of time was irrelevant to the proceedings of the HRC.

Second Motion:

The Second motion on the floor was proposed by the USA and was on “circumstances where extra-judicial punishment may be necessary” and the motion stood passed owing to the voting majority. The delegates of Lebanon and USA sought the permission of the chair to read out to the council, the four points based on which the topic of the motion stands justified. The chair approved and this was followed by requesting each delegate to share the circumstances under which the extra-judicial punishment is meted out in their respective countries.

The session was then adjourned and the request for an un moderated caucus was approved, though it didn’t result in any acceptable outcome.

At the start of the session, we hoped:

“All is well until one man speaks”

During the commencement of the session, we were left to pray:

“All is well!”

"All is well!”

At the end of the session, we sighed:

“All is well when everybody finishes speaking”

On a more serious note, the proceedings of the HRC were conducted under the regulation of the chair and if the HRC can succeed in giving solutions to the motions discussed ,then they would give the United nations a run for their "peace"(A run for the money is for those who treasure money and since the UN treasures peace, we thought it appropriate to say so :) ).

Check out the video for animated discussions

Discussions in the HRC

Session 5:

General Assembly (Evening session on 27^th January 2011)

The General Assembly session commenced at 4:30 P.M in the Humanity and Sciences block. The executive committee consisting of the secretary general, the under secretary general, the President, the chairs and the vice chairs of the four councils, the director-security council reform were present at the meeting.

All the delegations from various countries were also present.

The session started off with the director of Security Council reforms inquiring if there were any motions on the floor. Various motions were raised and almost al of them as anticipated were from countries wanting representation in the Security Council that only the P5 nations now possessed. The countries that pressed for the same were Indonesia, India, Germany, Japan, Iran and Myanmar.

The other motion on the floor included the one made by Pakistan stating that the veto power should be abolished totally.

After long deliberations ,the council was adjourned and ended with a good number of motions being brought about.

Day1 at the Saarang MUN 2011

The Indian Institute of Technology-Madras is undoubtedly one of the premier institutes in India.If you thought that IIT is all about academics,you have to just be a part of the annual cultural festival of IITM-SAARANG to know its other side.This Saarang promises to be as creative as ever by organising various spotlight events,one of which is the truly outstanding concept of simulating the United Nations.The Model United Nations aims to sensitize the youth about the world affairs and their responsibility towards promoting world peace.This year Saarang MUN 2011 saw young people from through out India come together to share and contribute their ideas.

The Saarang Model United Nations(MUN) 2011 was kicked off with fervor on the morning of 26thJanuary 2011 with a warm opening ceremony in the IC&SR Main Hall of IITM and was addressed by the Director Of IITM, The chief guest, Ms Anita Nair and Professor N.Govardhan apart from the student organizing committee of the MUN.

Ms.Anita Nair in her address to the MUNers emphasized on UN’s message to the youth:
“Youth have to come together and discuss global concerns and not be interested in only one’s nation” and stated that Dialogue and mutual understanding were imperative to get solutions to the current global issues.

The opening ceremony was succeeded by the chairs of the four committees-Security Council, Committee on terrorism, Human Rights Commission, Economic and Social Council discussing points of interest with the respective members on being asked to do so by the secretary general Ms.Vaishnavi Srivatsan.

What the delegates felt - Tailored by the International Press (without a sewing machine ;))

Session 1:
Security Council (Morning Session Of 26thJanuary, 2011)

The session of the security council began as the chair, Ms Shina Gulati rightly said it would, at 11.30 A.M. (11:27 A.M to be more precise;) ) .The Vice chair, Mr.Debatra Ganguly and the moderator Mr.Aruj Arora along with the chair constituted the executive committee. The Secretary General with her presence and participation in the proceedings along with the well-spoken, knowledgeable executive committee and the diplomatic, well-informed delegates took the session to a new level.

Even though the agenda of the security council is supposed to be an open one, the agenda was decided beforehand-one wonders why!? The agenda : “The Current Situation in Afghanistan-Pakistan and its implications on world security”. After the procedures, rules of the session and the order of the General Speakers list were announced by the chair, the proceedings were deemed to have begun.

The first motion passed during the moderated caucus(10 minutes discussion with 45 seconds per delegate, extended later )was on the topic “Narco Terrorism and its effects in Afghanistan” by the delegate of USA, supporting a point made in the speech given by the delegate of Germany. This triggered what can be termed diplomatically as a “healthy relation” between the U.S and the Germany where many instances were witnessed during the session where the latter agreed with the former either by seconding motions or thumping in appreciation.

A brief look at the main points made by the countries:

· Rehabilitating the farmers by growing other crops suited to the soil - opposed by many, thumped by many others.
· Regulate the use of opium-which is the main drug cultivated in Afghanistan-for medicinal purposes only. While few nations felt it was appropriate, yet others felt it was impractical.
· Recognize the Taliban’s involvement in the problem and deal with it.
· Propaganda to the people of afghan asking them not to support Taliban on the grounds that the opium farmers won’t get support from it once the Taliban has the much needed political power.

Watch the video on the summary of the first motion by the Vice Chair person:

Second Motion: “Alternate funding for terrorism in Afghanistan”

· Discussing the various sources of funding for Taliban.
A heated discussion among the delegates of China, USA & Germany then ensued on the issue of Iranian involvement in funding Taliban.
· To have strict regulations and curbs on the cross border goods facilitating prevention of exports. Aren't we reminded of onions here!?
· Involvement of North America, ISAF etc in promoting LTTE- This suggestion was acknowledged by the chair to be a fairly good one and we thought the delegate who proposed the resolution wanted to could reach to his collar and straighten it a bit !.
· Establishing or setting up a common fund under the NATO to curb terrorism.
· Establishing other means and ways to curb terrorism. Example: Education-proposed, incidentally by the delegate of India.

Surprisingly, during the Second motion, there were no Indo-Pak confrontations on any front, which, owing to popular history is surprising. Even more surprising is the fact that the chairperson did not deem the indo-pak issue important enough to be suggested to the council when it is one of the burning current issues in Pakistan .

The atmosphere, overall, was warm with electrifying speeches and motions on the floor however, there were times when the temper got the better of the delegates as displayed by the delegate of China when he was highly displeased with a certain co-delegate and did not hesitate to show it in his body language. Also we wondered why a few delegates were not sharing their views on the motions passed though their countries were being discussed. Hazarding a guess : We think it was because they were first timers and were shy or took the quote "silence is golden" too seriously or were overwhelmed by delegates of a few countries who have been intimidating on the global front as well. The developing countries hyped to be the “to- be” leaders of the world, the current leader of the world, the country that after the first atom bomb drop gave "the current leader" sleepless nights and the country that had the greatest dictator the world ever knew-if you know what we mean!

During the course of the proceedings, the executive committee had questions which were no doubt tricky and difficult to answer. That the almost cornered delegates answered the questions- sometimes equivocally, sometimes otherwise is commendable. But the delegates had to be reminded to think of innovative motions and to defer from discussing redundant topics by the executive council. On the whole it was a session filled with animated and "meaningful" discussions, expressions and impressions.

Session 2:

Counter Terrorism Committee (Afternoon Session-26th January,2011)

The afternoon session of the Counter Terrorism Committee began at 2.30 p.m.in the conference hall no.1 of the IC&SR. The Chair Mr. Tathagata Ghosh addressed the council and inquired of motions, if any.

The First motion passed was on the topic “Measures to address why youth is being recruited into terrorism”

Second motion: Role of the internet in radicalizing youth.
Points discussed:

· Internet is the main source of information which can be used in both right and wrong ways-so discretion on the part of countries is needed.
· Counter argument to the above: Financial assistance is needed to fund the internet infrastructure-as most youth do not have enough sources of funds, they would not use the internet.

Starting from this point of time, the council was in a state of utter chaos. To say that the members were too deeply engrossed in the session to mind their body language or the rules of the council would be an under statement. While the delegates of Iran, UK, India, Pakistan, Japan, France were doing a great job to support and defend their own countries :

1) They disregarded the basic tenet of UN policy mentioned by Ms.Anita Nair in the inaugural function-"dialogue and mutual understanding".
2)As diplomats representing their respective countries, they ought to do a good job of keeping their emotions under control especially in the presence of executive members like the chair, the vice-chair and the secretary general herself.

Delegates of India and Pakistan in a pensive mood

Third motion: Source of the financial assistance for terrorists
The council elaborated the definition of financial assistance and classified them into tangible or intangible assistance in the form of money, weapons, infrastructure.

· Lack of financial resources – reason for youth getting attracted to terrorism.
· Control the flow of certain “strategic” materials-what the speaker meant by strategic materials were those that should be controlled in order to achieve a particular end .There was ,we are sure, a better word to be used than “strategic” in this context.

An unmoderated caucus as requested by the delegates was approved by the executive committee for 20 minutes ,during which the members decided to bring up the topics of “Methods to curb

recruitments of youth into terrorism” and “Protecting Human rights while countering terrorism” in the moderated caucus.

While we congratulate the delegates for adopting and arriving on a consensus for taking forward a good motion, they also deserve commendation on the sheer number of different solutions proposed.

The delegates also, must-with respect to the souls of the poor press-talk in such a way that a witness to the motion be able to comprehend which speaker is actually speaking and what he is saying and also be provided with ear plugs to plug in when the delegates disagree with each other “emphatically”. Though outside its purview the press hopes the Human Rights Commission passes a motion in this regard on its behalf;)

Fourth Motion: Methods to curb recruitments of youth into terrorist outfits :

· All the nations facing the problem of terrorism must strengthen their economy which may eventually lead to reduction in unemployment and finally, terrorism.

Fifth Motion: Protecting Human rights while countering terrorism :

· Creating employment opportunities for the youth.
· State government has to take initiatives against terrorist groups.
· Demographic balance.-For those who don’t know what Demographic balance is, it means equal distribution in direct variation to the population.

The proceedings saw the president of the security council reforms visit the council and participate in the proceedings as a part of the delegation of Iraq. The USA and Iran specifically had a lot of questions posed to them and had to take corrections, clarifications and commands from the honorable president-he is an executive after all and commands enough respect to put across the point he wants to with his gesticulations and articulations. To be laconic, “just do it”!(may be Nike is his favorite brand;))

While the day1 of Saarang saw IITM sing itself down to exhilaration-thanks to kk-, the CTC sometimes argued, discussed and on yet others deliberated itself down to exhaustion. The committee however, brought out important points as mentioned above and the member nations’ different takes on one issue show the multi-pronged approach of the delegates-only they ought to take those which are relevant to the topic at hand.

In the present scenario of the world, where innocent people are being butchered in millions,

CTC is the hope of the world to reform it for billions.!

See what the Chair person of CTC has to say: